- Email: [email protected]
Information needs of students in Israel — A case study of a multicultural society
The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
The Journal of Academic Librarianship
Information needs of students in Israel — A case study of a multicultural society R. Greenberg a,b,⁎, J. Bar-Ilan a,1 a b
Department of Information Science, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel University of Haifa, Younes and Soraya Nazarian Library, Haifa, Israel
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 5 February 2013 Accepted 7 October 2013 Available online 12 November 2013 Keywords: Information needs Information behavior Academic library use Second language students Academic assignments
a b s t r a c t Students turn to a variety of sources when searching for information for their academic assignments. This study uses findings from a survey given to 151 Israeli students attending a university in Israel. A questionnaire comprising 12 questions was administered regarding their information needs, information behavior, and difficulties in searching and writing an academic assignment. A special emphasis of the study was on the multicultural environment of the Israeli students and its effect on their information behavior. Results show that there is a significant difference between native language groups with regard to the use of search engines, the use of library services, and in the patterns of conducting their academic assignment. The findings imply that when the language of instruction and assignment delivery is the students' second language, they have special needs and should receive particular attention from the library and information services. © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
INTRODUCTION Studies indicate that as online information resources proliferate, students are making fewer visits to the campus library to retrieve information. Students turn to a variety of sources for information when completing academic work and they increasingly rely on the Internet as their primary information source. For students, the Internet allows access to a rich store of readily available materials that can be cited in a manner similar to the more conventional sources, such as books and academic journals (Biddix, Chung, & Park, 2011; Metzger, Flanagin, & Zwarun, 2003; Radia & Stapleton, 2008). There is growing concern among higher education professionals regarding how students' information search and retrieval skills are negatively influenced. Easy access to digital information raises concerns related to whether students put forth the effort expected of them and if they know how to find scholarly resources that measure up to academic assignments (Denison & Montgomery, 2012). Using an information behavior questionnaire, the goal of this study is to describe how Israeli students from the university of Haifa study conduct research, and find information. We asked about their needs, strategies, and preferred use of information sources for academic assignments, what difficulties they encounter with course-related research from start to finish, and how students evaluate the information they choose to use. We also tried to understand how students from
⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of Information Science, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel. Tel.: +972 4 8288331. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (R. Greenberg), [email protected] (J. Bar-Ilan). 1 Tel.: +972 3 5318351. 0099-1333/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2013.10.002
different native language groups from varied cultures and backgrounds seek information, the differences in their information behavior, and their difficulties in overcoming language barriers. LITERATURE REVIEW Given the prevalence of literature in the field, we have chosen to discuss the literature selectively. Studies conducted over the last decade indicate that for their academic assignments, students tend to use Internet search engines more than searching library resources (Currie, Devlin, Emde, & Graves, 2010; De Rosa, Cantrell, Hawk, & Wilson, 2006; Graham & Metaxas, 2003; Jones & Madden, 2002; Kim & Sin, 2007; Metzger et al., 2003; Thompson, 2003). In their academic searches students turn first to their easiest, time saving, familiar and accessible option (i.e., Internet search engines) rather than the library's qualified academic sources (Lee, Paik, & Joo, 2012). Accessing library resources takes much more time and is therefore reserved for larger projects such as research assignments. Accessing information on the Web is much faster, and although it may be less reliable and credible, it offers students the answers they need to review information quickly (Biddix et al., 2011; Jones, Johnson-Yale, Millermaier, & Pérez, 2008). Students tend to save themselves the effort of dealing with the library's discovery tools and databases. We cannot be sure whether they choose to do so because other sources are more convenient to use, or because they lack the necessary literacy skills (Thompson, 2003). According to Niu et al. (2010), research students use citation or bibliographic databases as their first source, while their second choice is Web search engines like Google or Yahoo, but they specifically added that the library databases are not user friendly or easy to work with (Niu et al., 2010).
186
R. Greenberg, J. Bar-Ilan / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191
In most previous studies, most of the students are young in age (in their early 20's) and define themselves as savvy Internet users. However, they conduct basic shallow searches in natural language and do not spend time locating keywords or using effective search strategies. They often conclude the search without having retrieved the best quality resources (Rowlands, Nicholas, Williams, Huntington, & Fieldhouse, 2008; Williams & Rowlands, 2007). Most of the students define themselves as qualified in searching for information; they are satisfied with their searches; they learn from their own experience and do not need any instruction. Yet some noted that they cannot find the precise academic information for their needs and view the process of searching for information as laborious but necessary (Denison & Montgomery, 2012; Gross & Latham, 2007; Head & Eisenberg, 2010a, b; Niemand, 2010). The age of the students as an influencing factor has been studied extensively but the findings are inconclusive. Some results indicate (Graham & Metaxas, 2003) that older students do not perform better searches than their younger peers — they rely on the sources of information found on the Internet and do not check their credibility — while other studies (Eshet-Alkalai, 2004; Gratch-Lindauer, 2007) indicate that older students have the ability (and experience) to choose more reliable sources and to critically examine the information they retrieve. The students report that the main difficulties in carrying out their academic assignments are to begin work, to define the research subject, to choose and evaluate the information source, and to understand their professor's requirements (Head, 2008). However, the results of Head's study indicate that the most dominant factors in students' information behavior are their tight schedules and lack of time. They decide to finish their search when the time set aside for the assignment ends or when, in their opinion, they have spent enough time on the task in comparison to the credit they receive for it. They are driven by efficiency, and have a consistent method of working that allows them to find their way around the information overload to which they are exposed when they search for information for an assignment. This fact may result in them using a limited number of the same “permanent sources” for all their assignments (Head & Eisenberg, 2010a,b; Prabha, Connaway, Olszewski, & Jenkins, 2007; Urquhart et al., 2003). Second language (L2) students find it even more difficult to cope with seeking information. They find it hard to search, retrieve, and access the needed sources, and have different information needs than that of native language students (Bhatti, 2010; Zhixian, 2007). These students need to take the extra step to linguistically decode information they have found. Although L2 undergraduate students have some awareness of differences in quality of research literature and are familiar with scholarly searches of electronic sources, they continue to cite inferior sources (Radia & Stapleton, 2008; Stapleton, 2005). Israeli students come from a multicultural society; as such, they have special characteristics. Multiculturalism is defined as “relating to or containing several cultural or ethnic groups within a society” (Multicultural, n.d.). In this survey we refer to students coming from diverse cultures and linguistic backgrounds as “multicultural society students”. In Israel there are some major ethnic groups, including Israeli-born Jews, Israeli-born Arabs, and immigrants. One of the largest immigrant groups is from the former Soviet Union (Central bureau of statistics, 2012). These groups differ in the first language they use; Hebrew, Arabic, and Russian, respectively. The literature makes some reference to these students but only rarely in the context of academic assignment behavior and information needs. Most of the studies refer to specially customized library services or to technical systems relating to multilingual searching and retrieval (Caidi, Allard, & Quirke, 2010; Hughes, 2010; Notess, 2008). One can also refer to international students and immigrant students as multicultural society students. Most of the studies (Liao, Finn, & Lu, 2007) identify barriers such as language and culture (social class and religious differences). The international students show a stronger
interest than the American students in reference instruction/ orientation/workshops and reference (Liao et al., 2007). International students are described in the literature as having fairly good information skills but they find it hard to use them due to the linguistic and cultural aspects of their information use (Hughes, 2009). Mehra and Bilal (2007) claim that foreign language students lack awareness of the multiple language interfaces provided by Google, and of foreign language resources available on the Web (Mehra & Bilal, 2007), while other studies indicate that they prefer to use their native language web sites (Caidi & MacDonald, 2008; Srinivasan & Pyati, 2007). ISRAELI STUDIES In Israel, several studies have been published on the usage patterns, literacy, and information needs of the Israeli students. In two studies of Israel college students (Avigdori, 2000; Chai, 2008) there was no correlation between ethnic group or mother tongue and information resources usage. Differences were found between students studying in various fields or faculties, especially in their approach to searching and using academic databases and their attitudes towards the use of English-language sources. In another study (Mizrachi & Shoham, 2004) on students studying in teaching colleges, there was a correlation between information and computer technology expertise and English language information sources usage. In a study of Israeli nursing students (Zafrir, 2011) a correlation was found between English language proficiency and information search and usage. Furthermore, the Arab students found it more difficult to use keywords and search strategies in English, as it is their third language. In their study about information seeking behavior of Arab students in a teaching college, Chai & Shoham (2012) note that the Arab student population learns their preliminary studies in elementary and high school in their native language of Arabic. This radical transition from the Arab speaking environment to the Hebrew speaking environment of the college or university leads to alienation and difficulty integrating into the academic system. In their study they found that the subjects preferred people (friends, colleagues, teachers, and librarians) as their first choice of information source. MAJOR ARTICLES ADDRESSED IN THE DISCUSSION In our study we specifically mention three recent studies on the information behavior of students. Head and Eisenberg (2010a, 2010b)) conducted a large-scale survey of college students from twenty-five US campuses as part of the US “Project Information Literacy”. They received 8353 responses and their survey concentrated on information seeking strategies and research difficulties. The major findings relevant to the current study were the use of the same information sources for all the academic assignments. The most difficult stages in the process of preparing the assignment were beginning the assignment, defining the subject, and narrowing down their search results. In the search process the most difficult task was searching the library databases. The most important factors for the American students in this survey were passing the course, finishing the assignment, and getting a good grade; although many of them also declared their desire to find the course interesting and learn something new. Niemand (2010) explored the information seeking behavior of 289 knowledge information students from the University of Johannesburg, South Africa, through a questionnaire. The major findings relevant to the current study were that the respondents met their information needs by utilizing the Internet as their primary source. The majority of the respondents indicated that they used search engines to find relevant information for their tasks and only 20% declared using the library as their source of information. Most of the respondents indicated that their basic Internet usage skills were gained through self-exploration. Lee et al. (2012)) used a self-generated diary method to investigate how 233 undergraduate students coped with their academic search tasks at the Yonsei University in Seoul, Korea. The major findings
R. Greenberg, J. Bar-Ilan / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191
relevant to the current study were that the students used search engines as their most frequently used sources of information and they used them to begin search tasks. The participants used Wikipedia and online databases to find further information. In particular, they clicked on hyperlinks offered by Wikipedia to extend their search topics. RESEARCH QUESTIONS We study the selection of information sources and associated factors in undergraduate and graduate students' search tasks by addressing the following research questions: 3.1 What are the sources of information used by the students? A. What information resources do students select to perform academic tasks? B. Are students critical of their choices of information resources? C. Are they using the library resources for researching their academic assignments? 3.2 What is the process of writing an academic assignment? A. How do the students search their information sources? B. What do the students define as important factors motivating the process of academic work? 3.3 What are the most difficult stages for students when preparing an academic assignment? 3.4 How do students acquire their information skills? METHODOLOGY The survey was conducted during the second semester (spring) of the 2012 academic year, at Haifa university, Israel. A call for the survey was sent out to selected lecturers (who collaborated in the past with library initiatives) from eighteen departments covering all six faculties of the university. Ten lecturers from four faculties were willing to participate. The questionnaire was administered to the students in courses selected by the lecturer, during class time. This process yielded 151 complete questionnaires. This sample was intended to represent the student population of the university. The sample comprised a majority of Jews born in Israel, a minority of native-born Arabs, and a minority of Jewish immigrants (mostly from the former Soviet Union). This was well reflected in the distribution of the mother tongue of the participants: Hebrew (100 students, 69%), Arabic (33 students, 23%), and Russian (14 students, 8%). The participants' age closely reflect data from the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS, 2011). In terms of gender, 54 (38%) of students were male and 89 (62%) students were female. The questionnaire comprised twelve questions: closed questions (some multiple choice and some Likert scale), partially open, and open questions (see Appendix). The questions were designed to answer the research questions. The questionnaires were anonymous, but we asked the students to provide demographic details to enable a deeper analysis.
187
RESULTS We surveyed 151 students from four different faculties. Since there were no statistically significant differences between the students in the various faculties or age groups we chose not to present an analysis based on the faculties or age. In this paper we specifically concentrated on the differences due to the native language of the respondents. The statistical tests compared more than two independent groups on continuous variables using the Kruskal–Wallis test, and compared between two independent groups on continuous variables using the Wilcoxon Scores (Rank Sums) test. The most difficult stage of the course-related research process for the Israeli students was getting started, chosen by 33 students (23%). The second most frequently mentioned step writing, was picked by 19 students (13%), followed by finding articles from databases, chosen by 15 students (11%), and choosing relevant sources from the information found, mentioned by 14 (10%). The most frequently chosen easiest part finding information in search engines, was picked by 40 students (29%) and defining the research subject, mentioned by 18 students (13%). We asked specifically about the sources they used for their most recent assignment (each student mentioned a few sources). Here, the students mainly mentioned articles (99 students, which is 66% of the total students in the survey), books (67 students, 44% of the students in the survey), and Web resources (58 students, 38% of the students in the survey). For their most recent assignment, they searched (each student mentioned a few sources) on the Internet, including search engines and web resources (162), and the library resources (109). These two questions were open questions, for which each student specified a list of resources. When searching for information for an academic assignment, the students indicated the Internet (search engines, 101 students (67%) and Google Scholar, 84 students (59%)) as their primary source of search. See Table 1. We found a significant difference (p value=0.0184) between native language groups with regard to the use of search engines. The difference was between native Hebrew and native Arabic language students (p value= 0.0096) [mean score of 3.91 ± 1.20 (median 4.00 — Hebrew) and 3.24 ± 1.32 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. There was a difference also between the native Russian and native Arabic language groups (p value = 0.0415) [mean score of 4.18 ± 1.08 (median 5.00 — Russian) and 3.24 ± 1.32 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. We also found a significant difference between the native language groups regarding the “ask a librarian” services (p value = 0.0314). The significant difference was between native Hebrew and native Arabic language speakers (p value = 0.0097) [mean score of 2.37 ± 1.22 (median 2.00 — Hebrew) and 2.94 ± 1.09 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. Most of the participants used library sources together with Internet search engines to meet their information needs. Thirteen students (9%) used only library resources, 92 (61%) used library resources with Web resources, 24 (16%) did not use library resources, and 21 (14%) indicated that they chose according to the assignment. 58 undergraduate students
Table 1 Sources used to gather information for an academic assignment. Sources
Not in use
Small degree
Medium degree
High degree
Very high degree
Frequency missing
Course reading Search engines Wikipedia Library web site Google Scholar Ask a librarian Ask a teacher Classmates Social web Ready assignments web sites
12 (8%) 8 (5%) 28 (19%) 13 (9%) 15 (10%) 40 (27%) 16 (11%) 18 (12%) 95 (63%) 99 (67%)
38 (26%) 21 (14%) 34 (23%) 20 (13%) 12 (8%) 46 (30%) 56 (37%) 44 (30%) 29 (12%) 29 (19%)
35 (23%) 21 (14%) 27 (18%) 26 (17%) 32 (22%) 31 (21%) 46 (31%) 35 (24%) 14 (9%) 7 (5%)
53 (36%) 44 (29%) 32 (21%) 43 (28%) 33 (23%) 21 (14%) 19 (13%) 36 (24%) 8 (5%) 9 (6%)
11 (7%) 57 (38%) 29 (19%) 49 (32%) 51 (36%) 12 (8%) 12 (8%) 16 (11%) 4 (3%) 4 (3%)
2 1 8 1 2 2 1 3
188
R. Greenberg, J. Bar-Ilan / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191
Table 2 Frequency of using content parts in the library home page. Content parts in library web site/extent of use
Very small
Small
Medium
High
Very high
Freq. missing
Rank based on extent of use (high and very high)
Search box Databases Information on services Reference Opening hours Refworks Remote access Highlearn Citation finder
29 (20%) 15 (10%) 60 (41%) 55 (37%) 97 (66%) 112(76%) 49 (33%) 22 (15%) 23 (16%)
(17%) 22 (15%) 36 (24%) 35 (23%) 27 (18%) 20 (14%) 30 (21%) 8 (5%) 15 (10%)
(20%) 38 (25%) 24 (16%) 31 (21%) 15 (10%) 10 (7%) 27 (18%) 13 (9%) 24 (16%)
(26%) 44 (29%) 18 (12%) 16 (11%) 3 (2%) 1 (1%) 24 (16%) 44 (30%) 55 (38%)
(17%) 31 (21%) 9 (6%) 12 (8%) 6 (4%) 3 (2%) 16 (11%) 62 (42%) 29 (20%)
3 1 4 2 3 5 5 2 1
4 3 7 6 8 9 5 1 2
(55%) and 39 graduate students (71%) chose the option of library sources together with web sites. When asked about using the different content parts in the library web site, the students indicated that they usually use the link to Highlearn (the university course portal) followed by citation finder, databases, and the library's search engine, based on the selection of high or very high extent of use (see Table 2). We found a significant difference (p value=0.0009) between native language groups with regard to the “information about the library” section. The significant difference was between native Hebrew and native Arabic language students (p value = 0.0002) [mean score of 2.00 ± 1.20 (median 2.00 — Hebrew) and 2.97 ± 1.30 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. Also, in the native Russian and native Arabic language groups (p value=0.0335) [mean score of 2.00±0.89 (median 2.00 — Russian) and 2.97 ± 1.30 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. We found another significant difference (p value=0.0016) between the native language groups in regard to the “Reference services” section. The significant difference was between native Hebrew and native Arabic language students (p value = 0.0003) [mean score of 2.08 ± 1.16 (median 2.00 — Hebrew) and 3.03 ± 1.33 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. The results showed that 133 students in the study perceived the library sources as trustworthy (92%): 69 of them (48%) said the library resources are highly trustworthy, while 64 students (44%) thought that the library resources are very highly trustworthy. When the students were asked to describe their pattern of work, 108 (75%) of them declared that they tend to use the same information sources in all the assignments; 68 (47%) of them to a high extent, and 40 (28%) of them to a very high extent. The second pattern declared as central in their work by 89 (61%) students is looking for English keywords: 50 (34%) to a high extent and 39 (27%) to a very high extent. The next popular option chosen by 84 (58%) students was looking for Hebrew keywords: to a high extent 49 (34%), to a very high extent 35 (24%). See Table 3. We found a significant difference (p value = 0.0163) between the native language groups in the section “finishing the assignment after finding the minimum number of resources”. The significant difference was between the native Hebrew and native Arabic language groups
(p value= 0.0070) [mean score of 2.66 ± 1.12 (median 3.00 — Hebrew) and 3.22 ± 1.13 (median 3.50 — Arabic) respectively]. We found another significant difference (p value=0.0071) between native language groups in the section “Using English keywords”. The significant difference was between native Hebrew and native Arabic language students (p value = 0.0022) [mean score of 3.72 ± 1.20 (median 4.00 — Hebrew) and 2.90 ± 1.30 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. In writing their assignment, the most important factor for 133 (90%) of the students was to get a good grade. Passing the course (121 — 83%), finishing on time (124 — 86%), and meeting the requirements (122 — 84%) were all equally important. Learning something new was important only to 84 (68%) of the students. See Table 4. The students were asked about the way they acquired their academic search skills. The majority (66 students, 46%) learned by themselves, and 20% (29) of them participated in instruction organized by the library or their department. Only 6% (9) learned from their friends and family members. 12% (17) mentioned both organized instruction and independent learning. The detailed distribution of the answers to this question is displayed in Table 5. DISCUSSION This study of Israeli students yields very similar results to recent studies published in the literature, although we observed some differences due to multicultural characteristics that are discussed below. In our discussion we specifically address three recent studies on the information behavior of students. In their study, Head and Eisenberg (2010a, 2010b) examined the information seeking strategies and research difficulties of American students. Niemand (2010) explored the information seeking behavior of South African students, and Lee et al. (2012)) studied Korean students from a university in Seoul, in achieving their academic search tasks. Like the American students, the most difficult stage of the courserelated research process for the Israeli students was getting started. The second step was writing, and the next two steps mentioned were finding the relevant information from the search results and extracting the relevant information for their assignment, as also declared by the
Table 3 Patterns in conducting an academic assignment. Patterns in conducting an academic assignment/extent
Very small
Small
Medium
High
Very high
Frequency missing
When I have found the number of sources requested by the lecturer, I stop searching If I cannot find the required sources in one or two searches, I try to change the subject To start a search, I look for keywords or basic search terms in Hebrew To start a search, I look for keywords or basic search terms in English I tend to use the same information sources for all my assignments I try to pick a similar subject for different assignments to save time I spend the same amount of time on each assignment
27 (19%) 23 (16%) 12 (8%) 12 (8%) 4 (3%) 31 (21%) 40 (28%)
26 (18%) 47 (33%) 23 (16%) 25 (17%) 4 (3%) 53 (37%) 38 (26%)
50 (34%) 42 (29%) 26 (18%) 19 (13%) 29 (20%) 34 (24%) 39 (27%)
32 (21%) 20 (14%) 49 (34%) 50 (34%) 68 (47%) 17 (12%) 13 (9%)
11 (8%) 12 (8%) 35 (24%) 39 (27%) 40 (28%) 10 (7%) 15 (10%)
5 7 6 6 6 6 6
R. Greenberg, J. Bar-Ilan / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191
189
Table 4 Important factors in writing an academic assignment. Important factors in writing an academic assignment
Very small degree
Small degree
Medium degree
High degree
Very high degree
Freq missing
Good grade Pass the course Finish on time Meet the required scale Learn something new
3 (2%) 6 (4%) 3 (2%) 2 (1%) 5 (3%)
2 (1%) 8 (5%) 2 (1%) 6 (4%) 8 (6%)
9 (6%) 11 (8%) 16 (11%) 16 (11%) 33 (23%)
43 (29%) 48 (33%) 44 (30%) 54 (37%) 49 (34%)
90 (61%) 73 (50%) 80 (56%) 68 (47%) 49 (34%)
4 5 4 5 7
American survey. Finding information on the web was the easiest stage for Israeli students in our study and also for the American students according to the PIL survey (Head & Eisenberg, 2010a,b). The students faced problems in retrieving relevant information, which possibly indicated their lack of proficiency in conducting an academic information search. When searching for information for an academic assignment, the students reported that the Internet (via search engines and Google Scholar) is their primary source of search. This behavior is similar to the South African students' way of meeting their academic information needs by utilizing the Internet as a primary source (Niemand, 2010) and to the Korean students who mentioned the search engines Google, Naver, and Daum as the most frequently used sources of information (Lee et al., 2012). Only a few students in our sample used Web 2.0 applications — a finding that matched the results of the PIL survey of American students (Head & Eisenberg, 2010a,b). Israeli students thought that the library sources are trustworthy. This finding was similar to the American students' study findings, who believed that library sources require less evaluation than information posted by anyone on the opensource Web sites (Head & Eisenberg, 2010a, 2010b). Unsurprisingly, like the American students, what mattered most to students while they were working on course related research assignments was passing the course, finishing the assignment, getting a good grade, and complying with the assignment requirements. Our findings show that both undergraduate and graduate students gained their academic search skills through self-exploration. This statement corresponds with the results obtained from the South African respondents. It can be explained by the fact that as the students interact with the digital environment in their daily life, they do not need comprehensive instruction on using or interacting with technology and they tend to learn by exploration (Niemand, 2010) (Table 6).
DIFFERENCES IN A MULTICULTURAL SOCIETY Our study examined the information behavior of Israeli students living in a multicultural society. In our sample, we were able to differentiate between three groups of students: Jewish Israeli-born students whose native language is Hebrew, Arab Israeli-born students whose native language is Arabic, and Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union whose native language is Russian. Both the Arab population and the Russian population need to cope with three languages: their native language, Hebrew — the language commonly spoken in the university — and English, which is the academic research language. The problem of coping with a second language for the majority of the Israeli students is hereby intensified for the students whose native tongue is Arabic or Russian. We saw significant differences between these three groups in their responses to several questions. When the students were asked about their preferred method of information retrieval, there was a statistically significant difference in using search engines for retrieving academic information between the Hebrew and the Russian language groups, who preferred search engines, and the Arab language group. This may be explained as the Arab-speaking population probably has more difficulty using English language sources and keywords (2013 Chai & Shoham, 2012; Zafrir, 2011). The findings that the Russian immigrants use search engines, despite the fact that they are a “third language population” and have an English proficiency problem, may be because they used their Russian language search engines and information sources. However this issue was not explored in the survey. This behavior is described in the literature as an online “E-Diaspora” phenomenon, suggesting that immigrants — both newcomers and longer established immigrants — have transnational identities in an online environment that have an effect on their information needs.
Table 5 Distribution of answers to the question: how did you acquire your academic search skills? Acquiring academic search skills
Organized instruction
By self
Organized instruction & self-learning
Friends and family
Instruction + friends and family
Friends and family + self
Friends & family, self + organized instruction
Freq. missing
Total Percentage
29 20%
66 46%
17 12%
9 6%
1 0.7%
5 3%
9 6%
7
Table 6 Comparison of the four studies. Issues Most difficult stage of preparing an academic assignment
Israeli students
Getting started Writing Easiest stage of preparing an academic assignment Finding information on the Web Primary search source of preparing an academic assignment Internet search engines Minimal use of Web 2.0 Library sources Trustworthy What matters most when preparing an academic Passing the course assignment? Finish on time Good grade Complying with the requirements Search skills Self exploration
American students Getting started Writing Finding information on the Web Minimal use of Web 2.0
South African students Korean students
Internet search engines
Trustworthy Passing the course Finish on time Good grade Complying with the requirements Self exploration
Internet search engines
190
R. Greenberg, J. Bar-Ilan / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191
They tend to use their home countries' native web sites or sites that are tailored to groups belonging to a particular cultural group or religious affiliation (Srinivasan & Pyati, 2007; Caidi & MacDonald, 2008). Another interesting finding emerging from the data was the statistical significance in the “Ask a librarian” section. We asked the students if one of their ways to search for information is to use the reference services. Both the Hebrew and the Russian language groups answered no; they hardly used it. In contrast, the Arab language group frequently used the services. In the literature we find that the foreign language students showed a stronger interest in reference instruction/ orientation/workshops and reference services (Liao et al., 2007). Since this population seemingly has a problem with English language proficiency (Zafrir, 2011n.d.), the library staff need to inform the students about the reference services and how to use them. They need more encouragement to use reference services (Chai & Shoham, 2012). Another point that strengthens this conclusion is in the section where we asked about finding English keywords before retrieving information. A statistically significant difference was found between the Arab language students who reported less use in comparison to the Hebrew and Russian language groups who reported high use. We asked the students about their use of library resources for academic assignments, and saw interesting differences between the three language groups. The Russian immigrants were the “heaviest” users of the Web as an information source, both in conjunction with library resources (55%) or using only Web resources (36%). Again we can relate this finding to the phenomena of tending to use their home countries' native web sites and having their own virtual native identity, enabling them to make less use of the information sources (in English and in Hebrew) of the library. Similar results emerged from the question relating to the use of content parts on the library's home page. When asked about the use of a citation finder in the library web site, all three populations indicated a high use of this option. This can imply that the Russian immigrant population may do its searches on the web but in order to retrieve the full text of an article they use the library web site. Both content parts of information about the library services and reference services via the library web site were frequently used, with statistically significant differences by the Arab native language population on average when compared to the Hebrew and Russian native language groups who reported low use. This can be explained as they are more familiar with all the services and the options offered by the library (Liao et al., 2007) than the native Hebrew speakers. When asking the students if they finish researching their assignment once they have found the minimal number of sources indicated by the lecturer of the course, once again we found that the Arab native language group differed significantly from the other two population groups. They were more likely to conclude their research after finding the minimum resources. This can be explained by their language difficulties in dealing with academic literature (Chai & Shoham, 2012; Zafrir, 2011n.d.). All three language groups used the same information sources for every assignment. Both third language populations — the Arab and the Russian native language groups — tried to choose a similar topic for all their assignments, but the Hebrew native language population chose a different one each time. This can be explained by third language students finding it harder to search, retrieve, and access the needed sources and having different information needs from native language students (Bhatti, 2010; Zhixian, 2007). These students need to take the extra step to linguistically decode the material they have to find (Stapleton, 2005; Radia & Stapleton, 2008). STUDY LIMITATIONS Our study focused on how the students performed their academic tasks but not on why they chose to do it in a certain way. We did not perform a controlled study and our sample was not random. The
study has no representative sample of all faculties on the campus. In the language groups we had only fourteen students from the Russian native language group. CONCLUSION The purpose of this study is to describe how Israeli students conduct research and find information. 151 students from different faculties answered a 12-question survey in class. • The majority of the students use search engines to search for their academic assignments. • The students find the library sources trustworthy and reliable but also difficult to use. • The respondents tend to use the same information sources for every assignment. • They use English and Hebrew keywords to conduct their search. • When writing their assignments, the most important factor is the grade. Other important factors are passing the course, finishing on time, and meeting the requirements • The students acquire their search skills by themselves. Only a minority of them received any instruction. • Due to the multicultural environment in Israel in general and in our survey in particular, we found significant differences between the different native language groups (Hebrew, Arabic, and Russian) concerning use of search engines, English keywords, and library services. RECOMMENDATIONS The study focuses on how the Israeli students perform their academic tasks. Due to the multicultural differences of the student population, special services should be offered to the different native language student groups; from intermediary services for search strategies, information use and retrieval, to special instruction, given in their own native languages. The libraries should be aware of the special information needs and attend to those needs so that the students will be able to better use the library services and effectively fulfill their information needs. REFERENCES Avigdori, D. (2000). Use patterns of databases in a heterogenic population: The case of Jordan Valley College. Doctoral dissertation. Ramat Gan, Israel. (Hebrew): Bar Ilan University. Bhatti, R. (2010). Information needs and information-seeking behavior of faculty members at the Islamia University of Bahawalpur. Library Philosophy and Practice, 314, 1–11. Biddix, J. P., Chung, C. J., & Park, H. W. (2011). Convenience or credibility? A study of college student online research behaviors. The Internet and Higher Education, 14(3), 175–182. Caidi, N., Allard, D., & Quirke, L. (2010). Information practices of immigrants. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 44(1), 491–531. Caidi, N., & MacDonald, S. (2008). Information practices of Canadian Muslims post 9/11. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3), 337–348. Central bureau of statistics (2011). First and second degree recipients, by degree field of study, sex and age. Retrieved from http://www.cbs.gov.il/www/publications/ students_03/pdf/t38.pdf Central bureau of statistics (2012). Statistical abstract of Israel 2012. Retrieved from http://www.cbs.gov.il/reader/shnatonhnew_site.htm Chai, I. (2008). Information seeking and retrieval by minority college students. Doctoral dissertation. Ramat Gan, Israel. (Hebrew): Bar-Ilan University. Chai, I., & Shoham, S. (2012). Patterns of using people as mediators in preparing academic tasks in Arab students population in an Israeli college. Meidaat, 8, 33–45 (Hebrew). Currie, L., Devlin, F., Emde, J., & Graves, K. (2010). Undergraduate search strategies and evaluation criteria: Searching for credible sources. New Library World, 111(3/4), 113–124. De Rosa, C., Cantrell, J., Hawk, J., & Wilson, A. (2006). College students' perceptions of libraries and information resources. A report to the OCLC membership: OCLC. Denison, D. R., & Montgomery, D. (2012). Annoyance or delight? College students' perspectives on looking for information. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(6), 380–390. Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93–106.
R. Greenberg, J. Bar-Ilan / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191 Graham, L., & Metaxas, P. T. (2003). Of course it's true; I saw it on the internet! Critical thinking in the internet era. Communications of the ACM, 46(5), 70–75. Gratch-Lindauer, B. (2007). Information literacy-related student behaviors: Results from the NSSE items. College & Research Libraries News, 68(7), 432–441. Gross, M., & Latham, D. (2007). Attaining information literacy: An investigation of the relationship between skill level, self-estimates of skill, and library anxiety. Library & Information Science Research, 29(3), 332–353. Head, A. J. (2008). Information literacy from the trenches: How do humanities and social science majors conduct academic research? College & Research Libraries, 69(5), 427–445. Head, A. J., & Eisenberg, B.M. (2010a). Truth be told: How college students evaluate and use information in the digital age. Project information literacy progress report. Project information literacy. Head, A. J., & Eisenberg, M. B. (2010b). How today's college students use Wikipedia for course-related research. First Monday, 15(3). Hughes, H. E. (2009). International students using online information resources to learn. Doctoral dissertation. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology. Hughes, H. E. (2010). International students' experiences of university libraries and librarians. Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 41(2), 77–89. Jones, S., Johnson-Yale, C., Millermaier, S., & Pérez, F. S. (2008). Academic work, the internet and U.S. college students. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3–4), 165–177. Jones, S., & Madden, M. (2002). The internet goes to college; how students are living in the future with today's technology. Pew Internet and American Life Project (Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org) Kim, K. S., & Sin, S.C. J. (2007). Perception and selection of information sources by undergraduate students: Effects of avoidant style, confidence, and personal control in problem-solving. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(6), 655–665. Lee, J. Y., Paik, W., & Joo, s (2012). Information resource selection of undergraduate students in academic search tasks. Information Research, 17(1) (paper 511. Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/17-1/paper511.html) Liao, Y., Finn, M., & Lu, J. (2007). Information-seeking behavior of international graduate students vs. American graduate students: A user study at Virginia Tech 2005. College & Research Libraries, 68(1), 5–25. Mehra, B., & Bilal, D. (2007). International students' perceptions of their information seeking strategies. Proceedings of the 2007 Canadian Association for Information Science (CAIS/ACSI) (pp. 10–12). Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Zwarun, L. (2003). College student Web use, perceptions of information credibility, and verification behavior. Computer Education, 41(3), 271–290.
191
Mizrachi, D., & Shoham, S. (2004). Computer attitudes and library anxiety among undergraduates: A study of Israeli B. ED students. The International Information Library Review, 36(1), 29–38. Multicultural. (2013). In Oxford Dictionaries Online. Retrieved from: http: //oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/multicultural Niemand, C. J. (2010). Information seeking habits of information and knowledge management students: A university of Johannesburg. South African Journal of Information Management, 12(1), 1–6. Niu, X., Hemminger, B.M., Lown, C., Adams, S., Brown, C., Level, A., et al. (2010). National study of information seeking behavior of academic researchers in the United States. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 61(5), 869–890. Notess, G. R. (2008). Multilingual searching: Search engine language tools. Online, 32(3), 40–42. Prabha, C., Connaway, L. S., Olszewski, L., & Jenkins, L. R. (2007). What is enough? Satisfying information needs. Journal of Documentation, 63(1), 74–89. Radia, P., & Stapleton, P. (2008). Unconventional internet genres and their impact on second language undergraduate students' writing process. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(1), 9–17. Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Williams, P., Huntington, p, & Fieldhouse, m (2008). The Google generation: The information behavior of the researcher of the future. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 60(4), 290–310. Srinivasan, R., & Pyati, A. (2007). Diasporic information environments: Re-framing information behavior research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(12), 1734–1744. Stapleton, P. (2005). Using the web as a research source: Implications for l2 academic writing. The Modern Language Journal, 89(2), 177–189. Thompson, C. (2003). Information illiterate or lazy: How college students use the web for research. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 3(2), 259–268. Urquhart, C., Thomas, R., Lonsdale, R., Spink, S., Yeoman, A., Armstrong, C., et al. (2003). Uptake and use of electronic information services: Trends in UK higher education from the JUSTEIS project. Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, 37(3), 168–180. Williams, P., & Rowlands, I. (2007). Information behavior of the researcher of the future. London: The British Library and JISC. Zafrir, H. Information Retrieval from online medical information sources by nursing students whose mother tongue is not English. Doctoral Dissertation. 2011 Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel. (Hebrew) Zhixian, Y. (2007). International student perceptions of information needs and use. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(6), 666–673.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
The Journal of Academic Librarianship
Information needs of students in Israel — A case study of a multicultural society R. Greenberg a,b,⁎, J. Bar-Ilan a,1 a b
Department of Information Science, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel University of Haifa, Younes and Soraya Nazarian Library, Haifa, Israel
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 5 February 2013 Accepted 7 October 2013 Available online 12 November 2013 Keywords: Information needs Information behavior Academic library use Second language students Academic assignments
a b s t r a c t Students turn to a variety of sources when searching for information for their academic assignments. This study uses findings from a survey given to 151 Israeli students attending a university in Israel. A questionnaire comprising 12 questions was administered regarding their information needs, information behavior, and difficulties in searching and writing an academic assignment. A special emphasis of the study was on the multicultural environment of the Israeli students and its effect on their information behavior. Results show that there is a significant difference between native language groups with regard to the use of search engines, the use of library services, and in the patterns of conducting their academic assignment. The findings imply that when the language of instruction and assignment delivery is the students' second language, they have special needs and should receive particular attention from the library and information services. © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
INTRODUCTION Studies indicate that as online information resources proliferate, students are making fewer visits to the campus library to retrieve information. Students turn to a variety of sources for information when completing academic work and they increasingly rely on the Internet as their primary information source. For students, the Internet allows access to a rich store of readily available materials that can be cited in a manner similar to the more conventional sources, such as books and academic journals (Biddix, Chung, & Park, 2011; Metzger, Flanagin, & Zwarun, 2003; Radia & Stapleton, 2008). There is growing concern among higher education professionals regarding how students' information search and retrieval skills are negatively influenced. Easy access to digital information raises concerns related to whether students put forth the effort expected of them and if they know how to find scholarly resources that measure up to academic assignments (Denison & Montgomery, 2012). Using an information behavior questionnaire, the goal of this study is to describe how Israeli students from the university of Haifa study conduct research, and find information. We asked about their needs, strategies, and preferred use of information sources for academic assignments, what difficulties they encounter with course-related research from start to finish, and how students evaluate the information they choose to use. We also tried to understand how students from
⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of Information Science, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel. Tel.: +972 4 8288331. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (R. Greenberg), [email protected] (J. Bar-Ilan). 1 Tel.: +972 3 5318351. 0099-1333/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2013.10.002
different native language groups from varied cultures and backgrounds seek information, the differences in their information behavior, and their difficulties in overcoming language barriers. LITERATURE REVIEW Given the prevalence of literature in the field, we have chosen to discuss the literature selectively. Studies conducted over the last decade indicate that for their academic assignments, students tend to use Internet search engines more than searching library resources (Currie, Devlin, Emde, & Graves, 2010; De Rosa, Cantrell, Hawk, & Wilson, 2006; Graham & Metaxas, 2003; Jones & Madden, 2002; Kim & Sin, 2007; Metzger et al., 2003; Thompson, 2003). In their academic searches students turn first to their easiest, time saving, familiar and accessible option (i.e., Internet search engines) rather than the library's qualified academic sources (Lee, Paik, & Joo, 2012). Accessing library resources takes much more time and is therefore reserved for larger projects such as research assignments. Accessing information on the Web is much faster, and although it may be less reliable and credible, it offers students the answers they need to review information quickly (Biddix et al., 2011; Jones, Johnson-Yale, Millermaier, & Pérez, 2008). Students tend to save themselves the effort of dealing with the library's discovery tools and databases. We cannot be sure whether they choose to do so because other sources are more convenient to use, or because they lack the necessary literacy skills (Thompson, 2003). According to Niu et al. (2010), research students use citation or bibliographic databases as their first source, while their second choice is Web search engines like Google or Yahoo, but they specifically added that the library databases are not user friendly or easy to work with (Niu et al., 2010).
186
R. Greenberg, J. Bar-Ilan / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191
In most previous studies, most of the students are young in age (in their early 20's) and define themselves as savvy Internet users. However, they conduct basic shallow searches in natural language and do not spend time locating keywords or using effective search strategies. They often conclude the search without having retrieved the best quality resources (Rowlands, Nicholas, Williams, Huntington, & Fieldhouse, 2008; Williams & Rowlands, 2007). Most of the students define themselves as qualified in searching for information; they are satisfied with their searches; they learn from their own experience and do not need any instruction. Yet some noted that they cannot find the precise academic information for their needs and view the process of searching for information as laborious but necessary (Denison & Montgomery, 2012; Gross & Latham, 2007; Head & Eisenberg, 2010a, b; Niemand, 2010). The age of the students as an influencing factor has been studied extensively but the findings are inconclusive. Some results indicate (Graham & Metaxas, 2003) that older students do not perform better searches than their younger peers — they rely on the sources of information found on the Internet and do not check their credibility — while other studies (Eshet-Alkalai, 2004; Gratch-Lindauer, 2007) indicate that older students have the ability (and experience) to choose more reliable sources and to critically examine the information they retrieve. The students report that the main difficulties in carrying out their academic assignments are to begin work, to define the research subject, to choose and evaluate the information source, and to understand their professor's requirements (Head, 2008). However, the results of Head's study indicate that the most dominant factors in students' information behavior are their tight schedules and lack of time. They decide to finish their search when the time set aside for the assignment ends or when, in their opinion, they have spent enough time on the task in comparison to the credit they receive for it. They are driven by efficiency, and have a consistent method of working that allows them to find their way around the information overload to which they are exposed when they search for information for an assignment. This fact may result in them using a limited number of the same “permanent sources” for all their assignments (Head & Eisenberg, 2010a,b; Prabha, Connaway, Olszewski, & Jenkins, 2007; Urquhart et al., 2003). Second language (L2) students find it even more difficult to cope with seeking information. They find it hard to search, retrieve, and access the needed sources, and have different information needs than that of native language students (Bhatti, 2010; Zhixian, 2007). These students need to take the extra step to linguistically decode information they have found. Although L2 undergraduate students have some awareness of differences in quality of research literature and are familiar with scholarly searches of electronic sources, they continue to cite inferior sources (Radia & Stapleton, 2008; Stapleton, 2005). Israeli students come from a multicultural society; as such, they have special characteristics. Multiculturalism is defined as “relating to or containing several cultural or ethnic groups within a society” (Multicultural, n.d.). In this survey we refer to students coming from diverse cultures and linguistic backgrounds as “multicultural society students”. In Israel there are some major ethnic groups, including Israeli-born Jews, Israeli-born Arabs, and immigrants. One of the largest immigrant groups is from the former Soviet Union (Central bureau of statistics, 2012). These groups differ in the first language they use; Hebrew, Arabic, and Russian, respectively. The literature makes some reference to these students but only rarely in the context of academic assignment behavior and information needs. Most of the studies refer to specially customized library services or to technical systems relating to multilingual searching and retrieval (Caidi, Allard, & Quirke, 2010; Hughes, 2010; Notess, 2008). One can also refer to international students and immigrant students as multicultural society students. Most of the studies (Liao, Finn, & Lu, 2007) identify barriers such as language and culture (social class and religious differences). The international students show a stronger
interest than the American students in reference instruction/ orientation/workshops and reference (Liao et al., 2007). International students are described in the literature as having fairly good information skills but they find it hard to use them due to the linguistic and cultural aspects of their information use (Hughes, 2009). Mehra and Bilal (2007) claim that foreign language students lack awareness of the multiple language interfaces provided by Google, and of foreign language resources available on the Web (Mehra & Bilal, 2007), while other studies indicate that they prefer to use their native language web sites (Caidi & MacDonald, 2008; Srinivasan & Pyati, 2007). ISRAELI STUDIES In Israel, several studies have been published on the usage patterns, literacy, and information needs of the Israeli students. In two studies of Israel college students (Avigdori, 2000; Chai, 2008) there was no correlation between ethnic group or mother tongue and information resources usage. Differences were found between students studying in various fields or faculties, especially in their approach to searching and using academic databases and their attitudes towards the use of English-language sources. In another study (Mizrachi & Shoham, 2004) on students studying in teaching colleges, there was a correlation between information and computer technology expertise and English language information sources usage. In a study of Israeli nursing students (Zafrir, 2011) a correlation was found between English language proficiency and information search and usage. Furthermore, the Arab students found it more difficult to use keywords and search strategies in English, as it is their third language. In their study about information seeking behavior of Arab students in a teaching college, Chai & Shoham (2012) note that the Arab student population learns their preliminary studies in elementary and high school in their native language of Arabic. This radical transition from the Arab speaking environment to the Hebrew speaking environment of the college or university leads to alienation and difficulty integrating into the academic system. In their study they found that the subjects preferred people (friends, colleagues, teachers, and librarians) as their first choice of information source. MAJOR ARTICLES ADDRESSED IN THE DISCUSSION In our study we specifically mention three recent studies on the information behavior of students. Head and Eisenberg (2010a, 2010b)) conducted a large-scale survey of college students from twenty-five US campuses as part of the US “Project Information Literacy”. They received 8353 responses and their survey concentrated on information seeking strategies and research difficulties. The major findings relevant to the current study were the use of the same information sources for all the academic assignments. The most difficult stages in the process of preparing the assignment were beginning the assignment, defining the subject, and narrowing down their search results. In the search process the most difficult task was searching the library databases. The most important factors for the American students in this survey were passing the course, finishing the assignment, and getting a good grade; although many of them also declared their desire to find the course interesting and learn something new. Niemand (2010) explored the information seeking behavior of 289 knowledge information students from the University of Johannesburg, South Africa, through a questionnaire. The major findings relevant to the current study were that the respondents met their information needs by utilizing the Internet as their primary source. The majority of the respondents indicated that they used search engines to find relevant information for their tasks and only 20% declared using the library as their source of information. Most of the respondents indicated that their basic Internet usage skills were gained through self-exploration. Lee et al. (2012)) used a self-generated diary method to investigate how 233 undergraduate students coped with their academic search tasks at the Yonsei University in Seoul, Korea. The major findings
R. Greenberg, J. Bar-Ilan / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191
relevant to the current study were that the students used search engines as their most frequently used sources of information and they used them to begin search tasks. The participants used Wikipedia and online databases to find further information. In particular, they clicked on hyperlinks offered by Wikipedia to extend their search topics. RESEARCH QUESTIONS We study the selection of information sources and associated factors in undergraduate and graduate students' search tasks by addressing the following research questions: 3.1 What are the sources of information used by the students? A. What information resources do students select to perform academic tasks? B. Are students critical of their choices of information resources? C. Are they using the library resources for researching their academic assignments? 3.2 What is the process of writing an academic assignment? A. How do the students search their information sources? B. What do the students define as important factors motivating the process of academic work? 3.3 What are the most difficult stages for students when preparing an academic assignment? 3.4 How do students acquire their information skills? METHODOLOGY The survey was conducted during the second semester (spring) of the 2012 academic year, at Haifa university, Israel. A call for the survey was sent out to selected lecturers (who collaborated in the past with library initiatives) from eighteen departments covering all six faculties of the university. Ten lecturers from four faculties were willing to participate. The questionnaire was administered to the students in courses selected by the lecturer, during class time. This process yielded 151 complete questionnaires. This sample was intended to represent the student population of the university. The sample comprised a majority of Jews born in Israel, a minority of native-born Arabs, and a minority of Jewish immigrants (mostly from the former Soviet Union). This was well reflected in the distribution of the mother tongue of the participants: Hebrew (100 students, 69%), Arabic (33 students, 23%), and Russian (14 students, 8%). The participants' age closely reflect data from the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS, 2011). In terms of gender, 54 (38%) of students were male and 89 (62%) students were female. The questionnaire comprised twelve questions: closed questions (some multiple choice and some Likert scale), partially open, and open questions (see Appendix). The questions were designed to answer the research questions. The questionnaires were anonymous, but we asked the students to provide demographic details to enable a deeper analysis.
187
RESULTS We surveyed 151 students from four different faculties. Since there were no statistically significant differences between the students in the various faculties or age groups we chose not to present an analysis based on the faculties or age. In this paper we specifically concentrated on the differences due to the native language of the respondents. The statistical tests compared more than two independent groups on continuous variables using the Kruskal–Wallis test, and compared between two independent groups on continuous variables using the Wilcoxon Scores (Rank Sums) test. The most difficult stage of the course-related research process for the Israeli students was getting started, chosen by 33 students (23%). The second most frequently mentioned step writing, was picked by 19 students (13%), followed by finding articles from databases, chosen by 15 students (11%), and choosing relevant sources from the information found, mentioned by 14 (10%). The most frequently chosen easiest part finding information in search engines, was picked by 40 students (29%) and defining the research subject, mentioned by 18 students (13%). We asked specifically about the sources they used for their most recent assignment (each student mentioned a few sources). Here, the students mainly mentioned articles (99 students, which is 66% of the total students in the survey), books (67 students, 44% of the students in the survey), and Web resources (58 students, 38% of the students in the survey). For their most recent assignment, they searched (each student mentioned a few sources) on the Internet, including search engines and web resources (162), and the library resources (109). These two questions were open questions, for which each student specified a list of resources. When searching for information for an academic assignment, the students indicated the Internet (search engines, 101 students (67%) and Google Scholar, 84 students (59%)) as their primary source of search. See Table 1. We found a significant difference (p value=0.0184) between native language groups with regard to the use of search engines. The difference was between native Hebrew and native Arabic language students (p value= 0.0096) [mean score of 3.91 ± 1.20 (median 4.00 — Hebrew) and 3.24 ± 1.32 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. There was a difference also between the native Russian and native Arabic language groups (p value = 0.0415) [mean score of 4.18 ± 1.08 (median 5.00 — Russian) and 3.24 ± 1.32 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. We also found a significant difference between the native language groups regarding the “ask a librarian” services (p value = 0.0314). The significant difference was between native Hebrew and native Arabic language speakers (p value = 0.0097) [mean score of 2.37 ± 1.22 (median 2.00 — Hebrew) and 2.94 ± 1.09 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. Most of the participants used library sources together with Internet search engines to meet their information needs. Thirteen students (9%) used only library resources, 92 (61%) used library resources with Web resources, 24 (16%) did not use library resources, and 21 (14%) indicated that they chose according to the assignment. 58 undergraduate students
Table 1 Sources used to gather information for an academic assignment. Sources
Not in use
Small degree
Medium degree
High degree
Very high degree
Frequency missing
Course reading Search engines Wikipedia Library web site Google Scholar Ask a librarian Ask a teacher Classmates Social web Ready assignments web sites
12 (8%) 8 (5%) 28 (19%) 13 (9%) 15 (10%) 40 (27%) 16 (11%) 18 (12%) 95 (63%) 99 (67%)
38 (26%) 21 (14%) 34 (23%) 20 (13%) 12 (8%) 46 (30%) 56 (37%) 44 (30%) 29 (12%) 29 (19%)
35 (23%) 21 (14%) 27 (18%) 26 (17%) 32 (22%) 31 (21%) 46 (31%) 35 (24%) 14 (9%) 7 (5%)
53 (36%) 44 (29%) 32 (21%) 43 (28%) 33 (23%) 21 (14%) 19 (13%) 36 (24%) 8 (5%) 9 (6%)
11 (7%) 57 (38%) 29 (19%) 49 (32%) 51 (36%) 12 (8%) 12 (8%) 16 (11%) 4 (3%) 4 (3%)
2 1 8 1 2 2 1 3
188
R. Greenberg, J. Bar-Ilan / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191
Table 2 Frequency of using content parts in the library home page. Content parts in library web site/extent of use
Very small
Small
Medium
High
Very high
Freq. missing
Rank based on extent of use (high and very high)
Search box Databases Information on services Reference Opening hours Refworks Remote access Highlearn Citation finder
29 (20%) 15 (10%) 60 (41%) 55 (37%) 97 (66%) 112(76%) 49 (33%) 22 (15%) 23 (16%)
(17%) 22 (15%) 36 (24%) 35 (23%) 27 (18%) 20 (14%) 30 (21%) 8 (5%) 15 (10%)
(20%) 38 (25%) 24 (16%) 31 (21%) 15 (10%) 10 (7%) 27 (18%) 13 (9%) 24 (16%)
(26%) 44 (29%) 18 (12%) 16 (11%) 3 (2%) 1 (1%) 24 (16%) 44 (30%) 55 (38%)
(17%) 31 (21%) 9 (6%) 12 (8%) 6 (4%) 3 (2%) 16 (11%) 62 (42%) 29 (20%)
3 1 4 2 3 5 5 2 1
4 3 7 6 8 9 5 1 2
(55%) and 39 graduate students (71%) chose the option of library sources together with web sites. When asked about using the different content parts in the library web site, the students indicated that they usually use the link to Highlearn (the university course portal) followed by citation finder, databases, and the library's search engine, based on the selection of high or very high extent of use (see Table 2). We found a significant difference (p value=0.0009) between native language groups with regard to the “information about the library” section. The significant difference was between native Hebrew and native Arabic language students (p value = 0.0002) [mean score of 2.00 ± 1.20 (median 2.00 — Hebrew) and 2.97 ± 1.30 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. Also, in the native Russian and native Arabic language groups (p value=0.0335) [mean score of 2.00±0.89 (median 2.00 — Russian) and 2.97 ± 1.30 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. We found another significant difference (p value=0.0016) between the native language groups in regard to the “Reference services” section. The significant difference was between native Hebrew and native Arabic language students (p value = 0.0003) [mean score of 2.08 ± 1.16 (median 2.00 — Hebrew) and 3.03 ± 1.33 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. The results showed that 133 students in the study perceived the library sources as trustworthy (92%): 69 of them (48%) said the library resources are highly trustworthy, while 64 students (44%) thought that the library resources are very highly trustworthy. When the students were asked to describe their pattern of work, 108 (75%) of them declared that they tend to use the same information sources in all the assignments; 68 (47%) of them to a high extent, and 40 (28%) of them to a very high extent. The second pattern declared as central in their work by 89 (61%) students is looking for English keywords: 50 (34%) to a high extent and 39 (27%) to a very high extent. The next popular option chosen by 84 (58%) students was looking for Hebrew keywords: to a high extent 49 (34%), to a very high extent 35 (24%). See Table 3. We found a significant difference (p value = 0.0163) between the native language groups in the section “finishing the assignment after finding the minimum number of resources”. The significant difference was between the native Hebrew and native Arabic language groups
(p value= 0.0070) [mean score of 2.66 ± 1.12 (median 3.00 — Hebrew) and 3.22 ± 1.13 (median 3.50 — Arabic) respectively]. We found another significant difference (p value=0.0071) between native language groups in the section “Using English keywords”. The significant difference was between native Hebrew and native Arabic language students (p value = 0.0022) [mean score of 3.72 ± 1.20 (median 4.00 — Hebrew) and 2.90 ± 1.30 (median 3.00 — Arabic) respectively]. In writing their assignment, the most important factor for 133 (90%) of the students was to get a good grade. Passing the course (121 — 83%), finishing on time (124 — 86%), and meeting the requirements (122 — 84%) were all equally important. Learning something new was important only to 84 (68%) of the students. See Table 4. The students were asked about the way they acquired their academic search skills. The majority (66 students, 46%) learned by themselves, and 20% (29) of them participated in instruction organized by the library or their department. Only 6% (9) learned from their friends and family members. 12% (17) mentioned both organized instruction and independent learning. The detailed distribution of the answers to this question is displayed in Table 5. DISCUSSION This study of Israeli students yields very similar results to recent studies published in the literature, although we observed some differences due to multicultural characteristics that are discussed below. In our discussion we specifically address three recent studies on the information behavior of students. In their study, Head and Eisenberg (2010a, 2010b) examined the information seeking strategies and research difficulties of American students. Niemand (2010) explored the information seeking behavior of South African students, and Lee et al. (2012)) studied Korean students from a university in Seoul, in achieving their academic search tasks. Like the American students, the most difficult stage of the courserelated research process for the Israeli students was getting started. The second step was writing, and the next two steps mentioned were finding the relevant information from the search results and extracting the relevant information for their assignment, as also declared by the
Table 3 Patterns in conducting an academic assignment. Patterns in conducting an academic assignment/extent
Very small
Small
Medium
High
Very high
Frequency missing
When I have found the number of sources requested by the lecturer, I stop searching If I cannot find the required sources in one or two searches, I try to change the subject To start a search, I look for keywords or basic search terms in Hebrew To start a search, I look for keywords or basic search terms in English I tend to use the same information sources for all my assignments I try to pick a similar subject for different assignments to save time I spend the same amount of time on each assignment
27 (19%) 23 (16%) 12 (8%) 12 (8%) 4 (3%) 31 (21%) 40 (28%)
26 (18%) 47 (33%) 23 (16%) 25 (17%) 4 (3%) 53 (37%) 38 (26%)
50 (34%) 42 (29%) 26 (18%) 19 (13%) 29 (20%) 34 (24%) 39 (27%)
32 (21%) 20 (14%) 49 (34%) 50 (34%) 68 (47%) 17 (12%) 13 (9%)
11 (8%) 12 (8%) 35 (24%) 39 (27%) 40 (28%) 10 (7%) 15 (10%)
5 7 6 6 6 6 6
R. Greenberg, J. Bar-Ilan / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191
189
Table 4 Important factors in writing an academic assignment. Important factors in writing an academic assignment
Very small degree
Small degree
Medium degree
High degree
Very high degree
Freq missing
Good grade Pass the course Finish on time Meet the required scale Learn something new
3 (2%) 6 (4%) 3 (2%) 2 (1%) 5 (3%)
2 (1%) 8 (5%) 2 (1%) 6 (4%) 8 (6%)
9 (6%) 11 (8%) 16 (11%) 16 (11%) 33 (23%)
43 (29%) 48 (33%) 44 (30%) 54 (37%) 49 (34%)
90 (61%) 73 (50%) 80 (56%) 68 (47%) 49 (34%)
4 5 4 5 7
American survey. Finding information on the web was the easiest stage for Israeli students in our study and also for the American students according to the PIL survey (Head & Eisenberg, 2010a,b). The students faced problems in retrieving relevant information, which possibly indicated their lack of proficiency in conducting an academic information search. When searching for information for an academic assignment, the students reported that the Internet (via search engines and Google Scholar) is their primary source of search. This behavior is similar to the South African students' way of meeting their academic information needs by utilizing the Internet as a primary source (Niemand, 2010) and to the Korean students who mentioned the search engines Google, Naver, and Daum as the most frequently used sources of information (Lee et al., 2012). Only a few students in our sample used Web 2.0 applications — a finding that matched the results of the PIL survey of American students (Head & Eisenberg, 2010a,b). Israeli students thought that the library sources are trustworthy. This finding was similar to the American students' study findings, who believed that library sources require less evaluation than information posted by anyone on the opensource Web sites (Head & Eisenberg, 2010a, 2010b). Unsurprisingly, like the American students, what mattered most to students while they were working on course related research assignments was passing the course, finishing the assignment, getting a good grade, and complying with the assignment requirements. Our findings show that both undergraduate and graduate students gained their academic search skills through self-exploration. This statement corresponds with the results obtained from the South African respondents. It can be explained by the fact that as the students interact with the digital environment in their daily life, they do not need comprehensive instruction on using or interacting with technology and they tend to learn by exploration (Niemand, 2010) (Table 6).
DIFFERENCES IN A MULTICULTURAL SOCIETY Our study examined the information behavior of Israeli students living in a multicultural society. In our sample, we were able to differentiate between three groups of students: Jewish Israeli-born students whose native language is Hebrew, Arab Israeli-born students whose native language is Arabic, and Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union whose native language is Russian. Both the Arab population and the Russian population need to cope with three languages: their native language, Hebrew — the language commonly spoken in the university — and English, which is the academic research language. The problem of coping with a second language for the majority of the Israeli students is hereby intensified for the students whose native tongue is Arabic or Russian. We saw significant differences between these three groups in their responses to several questions. When the students were asked about their preferred method of information retrieval, there was a statistically significant difference in using search engines for retrieving academic information between the Hebrew and the Russian language groups, who preferred search engines, and the Arab language group. This may be explained as the Arab-speaking population probably has more difficulty using English language sources and keywords (2013 Chai & Shoham, 2012; Zafrir, 2011). The findings that the Russian immigrants use search engines, despite the fact that they are a “third language population” and have an English proficiency problem, may be because they used their Russian language search engines and information sources. However this issue was not explored in the survey. This behavior is described in the literature as an online “E-Diaspora” phenomenon, suggesting that immigrants — both newcomers and longer established immigrants — have transnational identities in an online environment that have an effect on their information needs.
Table 5 Distribution of answers to the question: how did you acquire your academic search skills? Acquiring academic search skills
Organized instruction
By self
Organized instruction & self-learning
Friends and family
Instruction + friends and family
Friends and family + self
Friends & family, self + organized instruction
Freq. missing
Total Percentage
29 20%
66 46%
17 12%
9 6%
1 0.7%
5 3%
9 6%
7
Table 6 Comparison of the four studies. Issues Most difficult stage of preparing an academic assignment
Israeli students
Getting started Writing Easiest stage of preparing an academic assignment Finding information on the Web Primary search source of preparing an academic assignment Internet search engines Minimal use of Web 2.0 Library sources Trustworthy What matters most when preparing an academic Passing the course assignment? Finish on time Good grade Complying with the requirements Search skills Self exploration
American students Getting started Writing Finding information on the Web Minimal use of Web 2.0
South African students Korean students
Internet search engines
Trustworthy Passing the course Finish on time Good grade Complying with the requirements Self exploration
Internet search engines
190
R. Greenberg, J. Bar-Ilan / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191
They tend to use their home countries' native web sites or sites that are tailored to groups belonging to a particular cultural group or religious affiliation (Srinivasan & Pyati, 2007; Caidi & MacDonald, 2008). Another interesting finding emerging from the data was the statistical significance in the “Ask a librarian” section. We asked the students if one of their ways to search for information is to use the reference services. Both the Hebrew and the Russian language groups answered no; they hardly used it. In contrast, the Arab language group frequently used the services. In the literature we find that the foreign language students showed a stronger interest in reference instruction/ orientation/workshops and reference services (Liao et al., 2007). Since this population seemingly has a problem with English language proficiency (Zafrir, 2011n.d.), the library staff need to inform the students about the reference services and how to use them. They need more encouragement to use reference services (Chai & Shoham, 2012). Another point that strengthens this conclusion is in the section where we asked about finding English keywords before retrieving information. A statistically significant difference was found between the Arab language students who reported less use in comparison to the Hebrew and Russian language groups who reported high use. We asked the students about their use of library resources for academic assignments, and saw interesting differences between the three language groups. The Russian immigrants were the “heaviest” users of the Web as an information source, both in conjunction with library resources (55%) or using only Web resources (36%). Again we can relate this finding to the phenomena of tending to use their home countries' native web sites and having their own virtual native identity, enabling them to make less use of the information sources (in English and in Hebrew) of the library. Similar results emerged from the question relating to the use of content parts on the library's home page. When asked about the use of a citation finder in the library web site, all three populations indicated a high use of this option. This can imply that the Russian immigrant population may do its searches on the web but in order to retrieve the full text of an article they use the library web site. Both content parts of information about the library services and reference services via the library web site were frequently used, with statistically significant differences by the Arab native language population on average when compared to the Hebrew and Russian native language groups who reported low use. This can be explained as they are more familiar with all the services and the options offered by the library (Liao et al., 2007) than the native Hebrew speakers. When asking the students if they finish researching their assignment once they have found the minimal number of sources indicated by the lecturer of the course, once again we found that the Arab native language group differed significantly from the other two population groups. They were more likely to conclude their research after finding the minimum resources. This can be explained by their language difficulties in dealing with academic literature (Chai & Shoham, 2012; Zafrir, 2011n.d.). All three language groups used the same information sources for every assignment. Both third language populations — the Arab and the Russian native language groups — tried to choose a similar topic for all their assignments, but the Hebrew native language population chose a different one each time. This can be explained by third language students finding it harder to search, retrieve, and access the needed sources and having different information needs from native language students (Bhatti, 2010; Zhixian, 2007). These students need to take the extra step to linguistically decode the material they have to find (Stapleton, 2005; Radia & Stapleton, 2008). STUDY LIMITATIONS Our study focused on how the students performed their academic tasks but not on why they chose to do it in a certain way. We did not perform a controlled study and our sample was not random. The
study has no representative sample of all faculties on the campus. In the language groups we had only fourteen students from the Russian native language group. CONCLUSION The purpose of this study is to describe how Israeli students conduct research and find information. 151 students from different faculties answered a 12-question survey in class. • The majority of the students use search engines to search for their academic assignments. • The students find the library sources trustworthy and reliable but also difficult to use. • The respondents tend to use the same information sources for every assignment. • They use English and Hebrew keywords to conduct their search. • When writing their assignments, the most important factor is the grade. Other important factors are passing the course, finishing on time, and meeting the requirements • The students acquire their search skills by themselves. Only a minority of them received any instruction. • Due to the multicultural environment in Israel in general and in our survey in particular, we found significant differences between the different native language groups (Hebrew, Arabic, and Russian) concerning use of search engines, English keywords, and library services. RECOMMENDATIONS The study focuses on how the Israeli students perform their academic tasks. Due to the multicultural differences of the student population, special services should be offered to the different native language student groups; from intermediary services for search strategies, information use and retrieval, to special instruction, given in their own native languages. The libraries should be aware of the special information needs and attend to those needs so that the students will be able to better use the library services and effectively fulfill their information needs. REFERENCES Avigdori, D. (2000). Use patterns of databases in a heterogenic population: The case of Jordan Valley College. Doctoral dissertation. Ramat Gan, Israel. (Hebrew): Bar Ilan University. Bhatti, R. (2010). Information needs and information-seeking behavior of faculty members at the Islamia University of Bahawalpur. Library Philosophy and Practice, 314, 1–11. Biddix, J. P., Chung, C. J., & Park, H. W. (2011). Convenience or credibility? A study of college student online research behaviors. The Internet and Higher Education, 14(3), 175–182. Caidi, N., Allard, D., & Quirke, L. (2010). Information practices of immigrants. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 44(1), 491–531. Caidi, N., & MacDonald, S. (2008). Information practices of Canadian Muslims post 9/11. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3), 337–348. Central bureau of statistics (2011). First and second degree recipients, by degree field of study, sex and age. Retrieved from http://www.cbs.gov.il/www/publications/ students_03/pdf/t38.pdf Central bureau of statistics (2012). Statistical abstract of Israel 2012. Retrieved from http://www.cbs.gov.il/reader/shnatonhnew_site.htm Chai, I. (2008). Information seeking and retrieval by minority college students. Doctoral dissertation. Ramat Gan, Israel. (Hebrew): Bar-Ilan University. Chai, I., & Shoham, S. (2012). Patterns of using people as mediators in preparing academic tasks in Arab students population in an Israeli college. Meidaat, 8, 33–45 (Hebrew). Currie, L., Devlin, F., Emde, J., & Graves, K. (2010). Undergraduate search strategies and evaluation criteria: Searching for credible sources. New Library World, 111(3/4), 113–124. De Rosa, C., Cantrell, J., Hawk, J., & Wilson, A. (2006). College students' perceptions of libraries and information resources. A report to the OCLC membership: OCLC. Denison, D. R., & Montgomery, D. (2012). Annoyance or delight? College students' perspectives on looking for information. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(6), 380–390. Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93–106.
R. Greenberg, J. Bar-Ilan / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 185–191 Graham, L., & Metaxas, P. T. (2003). Of course it's true; I saw it on the internet! Critical thinking in the internet era. Communications of the ACM, 46(5), 70–75. Gratch-Lindauer, B. (2007). Information literacy-related student behaviors: Results from the NSSE items. College & Research Libraries News, 68(7), 432–441. Gross, M., & Latham, D. (2007). Attaining information literacy: An investigation of the relationship between skill level, self-estimates of skill, and library anxiety. Library & Information Science Research, 29(3), 332–353. Head, A. J. (2008). Information literacy from the trenches: How do humanities and social science majors conduct academic research? College & Research Libraries, 69(5), 427–445. Head, A. J., & Eisenberg, B.M. (2010a). Truth be told: How college students evaluate and use information in the digital age. Project information literacy progress report. Project information literacy. Head, A. J., & Eisenberg, M. B. (2010b). How today's college students use Wikipedia for course-related research. First Monday, 15(3). Hughes, H. E. (2009). International students using online information resources to learn. Doctoral dissertation. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology. Hughes, H. E. (2010). International students' experiences of university libraries and librarians. Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 41(2), 77–89. Jones, S., Johnson-Yale, C., Millermaier, S., & Pérez, F. S. (2008). Academic work, the internet and U.S. college students. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3–4), 165–177. Jones, S., & Madden, M. (2002). The internet goes to college; how students are living in the future with today's technology. Pew Internet and American Life Project (Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org) Kim, K. S., & Sin, S.C. J. (2007). Perception and selection of information sources by undergraduate students: Effects of avoidant style, confidence, and personal control in problem-solving. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(6), 655–665. Lee, J. Y., Paik, W., & Joo, s (2012). Information resource selection of undergraduate students in academic search tasks. Information Research, 17(1) (paper 511. Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/17-1/paper511.html) Liao, Y., Finn, M., & Lu, J. (2007). Information-seeking behavior of international graduate students vs. American graduate students: A user study at Virginia Tech 2005. College & Research Libraries, 68(1), 5–25. Mehra, B., & Bilal, D. (2007). International students' perceptions of their information seeking strategies. Proceedings of the 2007 Canadian Association for Information Science (CAIS/ACSI) (pp. 10–12). Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Zwarun, L. (2003). College student Web use, perceptions of information credibility, and verification behavior. Computer Education, 41(3), 271–290.
191
Mizrachi, D., & Shoham, S. (2004). Computer attitudes and library anxiety among undergraduates: A study of Israeli B. ED students. The International Information Library Review, 36(1), 29–38. Multicultural. (2013). In Oxford Dictionaries Online. Retrieved from: http: //oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/multicultural Niemand, C. J. (2010). Information seeking habits of information and knowledge management students: A university of Johannesburg. South African Journal of Information Management, 12(1), 1–6. Niu, X., Hemminger, B.M., Lown, C., Adams, S., Brown, C., Level, A., et al. (2010). National study of information seeking behavior of academic researchers in the United States. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 61(5), 869–890. Notess, G. R. (2008). Multilingual searching: Search engine language tools. Online, 32(3), 40–42. Prabha, C., Connaway, L. S., Olszewski, L., & Jenkins, L. R. (2007). What is enough? Satisfying information needs. Journal of Documentation, 63(1), 74–89. Radia, P., & Stapleton, P. (2008). Unconventional internet genres and their impact on second language undergraduate students' writing process. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(1), 9–17. Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Williams, P., Huntington, p, & Fieldhouse, m (2008). The Google generation: The information behavior of the researcher of the future. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 60(4), 290–310. Srinivasan, R., & Pyati, A. (2007). Diasporic information environments: Re-framing information behavior research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(12), 1734–1744. Stapleton, P. (2005). Using the web as a research source: Implications for l2 academic writing. The Modern Language Journal, 89(2), 177–189. Thompson, C. (2003). Information illiterate or lazy: How college students use the web for research. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 3(2), 259–268. Urquhart, C., Thomas, R., Lonsdale, R., Spink, S., Yeoman, A., Armstrong, C., et al. (2003). Uptake and use of electronic information services: Trends in UK higher education from the JUSTEIS project. Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, 37(3), 168–180. Williams, P., & Rowlands, I. (2007). Information behavior of the researcher of the future. London: The British Library and JISC. Zafrir, H. Information Retrieval from online medical information sources by nursing students whose mother tongue is not English. Doctoral Dissertation. 2011 Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel. (Hebrew) Zhixian, Y. (2007). International student perceptions of information needs and use. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(6), 666–673.